Early repeat imaging is not warranted for high-grade blunt cerebrovascular injuries

BACKGROUND The current management for blunt cerebrovascular injuries (BCVIs) includes repeat imaging 7 days to 10 days after initial diagnosis. This recommendation, however, has not been systematically evaluated. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the impact of early repeat imaging on treatment course. We hypothesized that a minority of patients with high-grade injuries (Grades III and IV) have complete resolution of their injuries early in their treatment course and hence repeat imaging does not alter their therapy. METHODS Our prospective BCVI database was queried from January 1, 1997, to January 1, 2013. Injuries were graded according to the Denver scale. Injuries, treatment, and imaging results were analyzed. BCVI healing was defined as a complete resolution of the injury. RESULTS During the 16-year study, 582 patients sustained 829 BCVIs; there were 420 carotid artery injuries and 409 vertebral artery injuries. The majority (78%) received antithrombotic therapy. For the 296 carotid artery injuries (70%) with repeat imaging, there was complete healing of the injury in 56% of Grade I, 20% of Grade II, 5% of Grade III, and 0% of Grade IV injuries. For the 255 vertebral artery injuries (62%) with repeat imaging, there was a resolution of the injury in 56% of Grade I, 17% of Grade II, 14% of Grade III, and 3% of Grade IV injuries. For BCVIs overall, there was healing documented in 56% of Grade I, 18% of Grade II, 8% of Grade III, and 2% of Grade IV injuries. CONCLUSION Injury grade of BCVIs is associated with the healing rate of the injury. While approximately half of Grade I BCVIs resolved, only 7% of all high-grade injuries healed. Early repeat imaging may not be warranted in high-grade BCVI; the vast majority of injuries do not resolve. The cost, radiation, and transport risk of early repeat imaging should be weighed against the potential treatment impact for individual patients. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE Therapeutic/care management study, level IV.

[1]  E. Moore,et al.  Endovascular stenting is rarely necessary for the management of blunt cerebrovascular injuries. , 2014, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[2]  Ben L Zarzaur,et al.  Blunt cerebrovascular injury screening with 64-channel multidetector computed tomography: More slices finally cut it , 2014, The journal of trauma and acute care surgery.

[3]  E. Moore,et al.  Blunt cerebrovascular injuries in the child. , 2012, American journal of surgery.

[4]  E. Moore,et al.  Blunt cerebrovascular injuries in children: broadened screening guidelines are warranted. , 2012, The journal of trauma and acute care surgery.

[5]  M. Wright,et al.  A systematic review and meta-analysis of diagnostic screening criteria for blunt cerebrovascular injuries. , 2012, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[6]  E. Moore,et al.  Blunt cerebrovascular injuries: Redefining screening criteria in the era of noninvasive diagnosis , 2012, Journal of Trauma and Acute Care Surgery.

[7]  J. Weigelt,et al.  Screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries is cost-effective. , 2011, The Journal of trauma.

[8]  T. Fabian,et al.  Optimal outcomes for patients with blunt cerebrovascular injury (BCVI): tailoring treatment to the lesion. , 2011, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[9]  Wilkins,et al.  Western Trauma Association critical decisions in trauma: screening for and treatment of blunt cerebrovascular injuries. , 2009, The Journal of trauma.

[10]  E. Moore,et al.  Treatment for blunt cerebrovascular injuries: equivalence of anticoagulation and antiplatelet agents. , 2009, Archives of surgery.

[11]  T. Scalea,et al.  Blunt cerebrovascular injuries: does treatment always matter? , 2009, The Journal of trauma.

[12]  S. Norwood,et al.  Internal carotid artery stenting for blunt carotid artery injuries with an associated pseudoaneurysm. , 2008, The Journal of trauma.

[13]  T. Fabian,et al.  Antithrombotic Therapy and Endovascular Stents Are Effective Treatment for Blunt Carotid Injuries: Results From Long-Term Follow-up , 2007 .

[14]  T. Fabian,et al.  Antithrombotic therapy and endovascular stents are effective treatment for blunt carotid injuries: results from longterm followup. , 2007, Journal of the American College of Surgeons.

[15]  C. Hong,et al.  Therapeutic endovascular treatments for traumatic vertebral artery injuries. , 2007, The Journal of trauma.

[16]  E. Moore,et al.  Carotid artery stents for blunt cerebrovascular injury: risks exceed benefits. , 2005, Archives of surgery.

[17]  L. Greenfield,et al.  Antiplatelet therapy: an alternative to heparin for blunt carotid injury. , 2002, The Journal of trauma.

[18]  E. Moore,et al.  Treatment-Related Outcomes From Blunt Cerebrovascular Injuries: Importance of Routine Follow-Up Arteriography , 2002, Annals of surgery.

[19]  E. Moore,et al.  Optimizing screening for blunt cerebrovascular injuries. , 1999, American journal of surgery.

[20]  E. Moore,et al.  Blunt carotid arterial injuries: implications of a new grading scale. , 1999, The Journal of trauma.

[21]  T. Fabian,et al.  Blunt carotid injury. Importance of early diagnosis and anticoagulant therapy. , 1996 .

[22]  B. Mokri,et al.  Traumatic dissections of the extracranial internal carotid artery. , 1988, Journal of neurosurgery.